The African Democratic Congress (ADC) and its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, have decided to challenge the Court of Appeal ruling that stopped the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising the party’s state congresses conducted by the David Mark-led caretaker leadership.
The ADC and Atiku announced their decision in separate statements after the judgement.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja upheld the Federal High Court ruling, which restrained INEC from recognising or taking part in the state congresses organised by the committee set up by the David Mark-led caretaker leadership.
The appellate court dismissed appeal CA/ABJ/CV/608/2026 and affirmed Justice Joyce Abdulmalik’s April 29 judgement, which stopped the caretaker leadership from interfering with the tenure and duties of the party’s elected state executive committees.
Reacting, the ADC said it had begun the process of appealing the judgement, “which we respectfully disagree with and consider to be legally unsustainable.”
In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Malam Bolaji Abdullahi, the party said the dissenting judgement of the presiding Justice “more accurately reflects the settled position of the law and the party’s position.”
Atiku, through his media adviser, Phrank Shuaibu, said he had directed his legal team to approach the Supreme Court for a final decision while expressing full confidence in the judicial process.
“Let no supporter of the ADC lose sleep. Let no Nigerian who believes in the restoration of our country be discouraged. The struggle to rescue Nigeria has never been about one courtroom or one judgement. It is a movement born out of the collective desire of millions of Nigerians for competent leadership, economic recovery, national unity and the restoration of hope.
“We, therefore, urge our members across the federation to remain calm, united and focused. Stay committed to the mission. Continue mobilising. Continue organising. Continue believing. No amount of legal gymnastics or political spin can extinguish the legitimate aspirations of Nigerians for a better country,” he stated.
The three-member Court of Appeal panel was led by Justice Abba Mohammed, while Justice Okon Abang delivered the lead judgement.
The Federal High Court had earlier ruled that the tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remained valid until properly constituted congresses and a national convention were held.
The case followed suit FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2026 filed by Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Hon. Olona Yinka, Dr. Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang and Obianyo Patrick on behalf of themselves and all ADC state chairmen and state executive committees.
The defendants included the ADC, Sen. David Mark, Sen. Patricia Akwashiki, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor, sued for the Caretaker/Interim National Working Committee, and INEC.
The plaintiffs challenged the caretaker committee’s decision to appoint committees for the April 2026 state congresses, arguing that only duly elected party organs could conduct such congresses under the party’s constitution.
Justice Abdulmalik agreed, ruling that neither the 1999 Constitution nor the ADC constitution gave the caretaker committee that power. She held that the state executive committees still had valid tenure and only they could organise state congresses. The court also dismissed the defendants’ objections and affirmed its jurisdiction.
Justice Abang, delivering the Appeal Court’s lead judgement, ruled there was no reason to overturn the lower court’s decision. Justice Donatus Okorowo agreed, while Justice Mohammed disagreed, saying the dispute involved the internal affairs of a political party.
Justice Abang said, “Once a complaint before the court is anchored on a constitutional infraction, the shield of internal affairs drops and the veil is lifted for judicial intervention.” The court added that intervention was necessary to “prevent anarchy and ensure the survival of democracy in Nigeria.”
The court also ruled that the congresses and national convention conducted by the Mark-led caretaker committee were nullities because they were held despite an existing Federal High Court order issued on April 14. It awarded N10 million costs against the ADC.
Justice Mohammed, in his dissent, maintained that the trial court lacked jurisdiction and said the state executive committees were only expected to prepare the agenda for congresses, not conduct them.
INEC’s Director of Voter Education and Publicity, Mrs. Victoria Eta-Messi, did not respond to requests for comment. However, an official said the commission would first obtain and study the Certified True Copy of the judgement before deciding its next step.
“We will need a Certified True Copy of the judgment. The commission will study it and discuss its implications before taking a decision,” the source said.
Abdullahi said the ruling would not affect the party’s direct primaries.
“The judgement has no effect whatsoever on the direct primaries through which the party’s candidates have emerged at all levels.
“We urge all party members and the millions of our supporters to remain calm, confident and focused.
“The African Democratic Congress remains committed to the task of providing Nigerians with a credible alternative and will continue to pursue that mission in accordance with the Constitution and the rule of law.”
Political analyst and Bayero University Kano lecturer, Professor Kamilu Sani Fage, said the judgement could disrupt Nigeria’s democracy ahead of the 2027 elections. He said it had “thrown a spanner in the wheel of ADC,” would create confusion and was likely to trigger more legal battles. “For sure ADC will appeal this issue,” he added.
Fage warned against using the courts for political purposes, saying such decisions “are not going to augur well for our democracy.” He added, “The ruling will also add up to the suspicion that the ruling party and the government have a hand in this case,” and, “It is going to add to the suspicion that the government has a hand in the whole issue.”
Counsel to the respondents, Ikem Ogugua, said the judgement strengthened democracy.
He said, “The matter started from the Federal High Court but they thought it was a fluke. They were aggrieved with the judgement of the Federal High Court, so they decided to appeal against it.
“The main judgement of the Federal High Court was that the tenure of the State executives is still running, it hasn’t expired, and it cannot by any disguise be circumvented because it is provided in their constitution, the number of years they have to stay in the office.
“Being aggrieved against the judgement of the Federal High Court, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal, and the Court of Appeal today (yesterday) has affirmed the judgement of the Federal High Court.
“What it means is that, whatever they did, the State congresses they organized, the national convention they organized, the court has just nullified it. So, the implication is that, as it is today, whatever decision that convention has taken, it is a nullity.
“In other words, I don’t want to put it straightforward, it appears that as of today, the ADC doesn’t have any presidential candidate. I know they are going to appeal it to the Supreme Court, we will also test the law there. “What the court has done today is that it has deepened the internal democracy of the political parties.
“It has strengthened our democracy in general, because what it means is that nobody is above the law. No officer of a political party can just act with impunity.”
Political analyst Jide Ojo described the judgement as “very unfortunate” and “saddening,” saying it threatened the ADC’s preparations for the 2027 elections.
He said the ruling raised doubts over the legitimacy of the David Mark-led leadership and candidates produced through its processes.
“The implication is very disturbing and very concerning because it has effectively undermined the legitimacy of the David Mark-led leadership,” he said.
According to Ojo, candidates produced through the affected processes risk not being recognised by INEC.
“The only option left for David Mark and his team is to approach the Supreme Court. As things stand now, INEC is bound to obey the subsisting court order,” he said.
He added that the judgement could also affect the party’s nomination process because INEC would not be able to process nominations arising from processes the court had invalidated.
